Something to ponder

[Mike Sheridan]

Isn't it odd that to be an Amateur Radio Operator you have to take an FCC exam, but to be a Professional Radio Operator not only do you not have to take a test but you don't even have to have a license...(I know there has to be a station license).

It's just I'm old enough to remember the days of 1st Phone and 3rd Phone.

 

[Tom Wells]

In keeping with most modern tech, it is assumed there are no user-level reponsibilities for understanding the technology.

The disconnect between radio and engineering is strange.

I'm old enough to be mad that the 1st class ticket was scrapped just before I graduated from Valpo Tech.
I never went for a ham ticket, I had only the 1st class in my sights.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

In keeping with most modern tech, it is assumed there are no user-level reponsibilities for understanding the technology.

The disconnect between radio and engineering is strange.

I'm old enough to be mad that the 1st class ticket was scrapped just before I graduated from Valpo Tech.
I never went for a ham ticket, I had only the 1st class in my sights.

You are right and I can relate. I have my Ham ticket but years ago it didn't hold much appeal. I wanted to play music on the radio!

 

[KeithE4]

Isn't it odd that to be an Amateur Radio Operator you have to take an FCC exam, but to be a Professional Radio Operator not only do you not have to take a test but you don't even have to have a license...(I know there has to be a station license).

It's just I'm old enough to remember the days of 1st Phone and 3rd Phone.

And I'm just old enough to remember when General, Conditional, and Extra all had the same privileges: All of them. ;D

Amateur licensing, as it's been set up since 1967, is an anachronism, but it can't be done away with completely. An amateur is personally responsible for his transmitter and license, while the broadcast engineer isn't (his employer holds the license and owns the equipment). But it can and should be streamlined into one class for everybody.

How about this idea: One class of Amateur license, good for life unless one gets nailed for severely violating FCC rules. Then the licensee would have 6 months to get retested or lose his license for 5 years. This license would only require enough theory to know how to properly read the rules (basic electronics & safety), but 75% of the test would be on the rules themselves. A passing grade would be 80% (40 of 50 questions).

The idea of requiring knowledge of advanced theory in order to operate on a few additional kilohertz below 21.45 MHz is ridiculous.

Now, before someone accuses me of wanting to "dumb down" the test, that is far from the truth. In 2008, knowledge of FCC rules is still required to properly operate an amateur radio transmitter, which still requires a background in basic electronics theory. One does not need the equivalent of a degree in Electronics Technology to operate any amateur-grade transmitter, but one must know the rules of the game. If one wants to build his gear, then he/she can obtain that knowledge if desired. I'm also saying that the passing grade should be raised.

Bottom line, I'm suggesting the following:
1. One class of license.
2. Less emphasis on theory, more emphasis on rules in the written test.
3. 80% passing grade to get your license.
4. Lifetime license unless one is cited by the FCC for major rules violations. Then a retest is required within 6 months or the license is revoked for 5 years.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

Keith, I have no problem with your suggestions for Amateur Radio but looking at it another way maybe it's the indvidual's exposure to the theory on the test that sparked in interest in the technical side of the hobby.

I'm sure you remeber a time when if you didn't home brew at least some of your equpment you were labeled an Appliance Operator. Not a very flattering term!

Back to the broadcast side a sec. I think the operator running the radio station should have some idea what the rules are even though compliance is the responsibility of the station owner.

 

[Tom Wells]

If the operator were "granted responsibility" that would/should come with higher compensation.

I can see why the current model of radio has little room for on-staff engineers.

I also hear some really awful signals out there as I travel, and in my local area.

If the the FCC can let broadcast engineering quality slide so badly, why even pretend that
it's important for ham band operation?

 

[KeithE4]

Keith, I have no problem with your suggestions for Amateur Radio but looking at it another way maybe it's the indvidual's exposure to the theory on the test that sparked in interest in the technical side of the hobby.

True enough, especially in my case. My exposure to amateur radio triggered by desire to get my degree in electronics, and I've been a professional in the field (both at the Technician and Engineer level) for over 30 years - not in broadcasting, however.

I'm sure you remeber a time when if you didn't home brew at least some of your equpment you were labeled an Appliance Operator. Not a very flattering term!

Yep, and it was silly even in 1970, when I got my Novice ticket. Home-brewing stopped being an absolute necessity after World War II, and even before the war, store-bought amateur receivers of varying quality existed. Transmitters, not so much, and one pretty much had to build his own antenna.

Back to the broadcast side a sec. I think the operator running the radio station should have some idea what the rules are even though compliance is the responsibility of the station owner.

Absolutely, but the legal responsibility of keeping the transmitter running properly still belongs to the station owner. The worst thing that can happen to the engineer is that he gets fired. The amateur can lose his license, while the broadcaster probably won't (he'll just hire a new engineer and fix the problems).